merit are the common footsteps to esteem and preferment, there would be no difficulty in universal emancipation, without a separation.  I have no idea that they are at all inferior to the white people in intellect; give them the same opportunity for enterprise and improvement.”  Their only sin, it appears, after all, is being “guilty of a skin not colored like our own.”  I may observe, in passing, that amalgamation, the bugbear of anti-abolitionists, is the necessary result of slavery, not of emancipation.

The preceding extracts present a faithful picture of colonization principles, though it is not every colonizationist who would avow them with so much simplicity.  The writer notwithstanding, manifests some benevolent feeling towards the slaves.  His conscience cannot be satisfied with the present state of things, and he, like too many others, takes refuge in the pleasing delusion that it would be practicable to convey these colored Americans across the Atlantic and make them comfortable in Africa, because their ancestors were born there.  As reasonably and as justly might he talk of transporting the white Americans to England because their ancestors removed from this country.

It is very easily demonstrable, that this could not possibly be accomplished—­that neither the means of transport could be found, nor the means of settlement provided; and were these impossibilities removed, it might also be shown, very easily, that it would be suicidal policy to remove the entire laboring population of the Southern States from a soil and climate for which they only are adapted.  Yet emancipation by removal is the theory of the Colonization Society, and in this point of view that Society must be characterized as a grand imposture.  What must be the power of that delusion which can render intelligent and philanthropic men the victims of such a fallacy?  If the whites, who hold the reins of government, could but be brought to exercise Christian feelings towards the people of color, which this worthy friend thinks is perhaps “morally impossible,” how rapidly would all difficulties vanish?  To accomplish this desirable end is the object of the abolitionists; they feel it to be difficult, but they know it to be not impossible.

The writer of this pamphlet uniformly couples “ultra slaveholders” and “northern manumissionists” in the same censure.  They are the two objectionable extremes; colonizationists and moderate slave-holders being, I suppose, the golden mean.  One illustration more of the animus with which he regards a black population.

“And so it is with the New England immediate manumissionists; they have so few people of color that they do not consider them an evil; and hence they conclude that the Southern States may do as they have done—­free them at once; but I have no doubt at all, if there was as large a proportion of colored people in the New England States as in the Southern, there would be but one voice, and that would be for colonizing them somewhere.”